The Xbox One is done

canna said:
Huh?

XBone / Xbox live is very different from steam. Steam has the following major advantages:

  • Doesn't cost ~$40/year.
  • Steam Sales offer substantially better value than console game sales.
  • Doesn't lock me out of games if I'm offline.
  • Doesn't cost 40K to the developer for a patch, which means bugs get fixed quicker since the developer doesn't feel the need to do one massive patch to maximize use of the patch fee.
  • Indie developer friendly

Also from a use perspective, I can do whatever I want to change the operation of my PC. Good luck doing that on the XBone. If the XBone is supposed to be one place for media consumption - marked by the fact that one of it's big advertised features is that it lets you watch TV, where is the cable card support?
Click to expand...

i was talking about the going all digital route, if you are comfortable buying games on steam knowing its digital only and no resale you should be comfortable buying them on xbone.

steam sales and fees to devs to patch is not something i was comparing it too.
 
Wildace said:
i was talking about the going all digital route, if you are comfortable buying games on steam knowing its digital only and no resale you should be comfortable buying them on xbone.

steam sales and fees to devs to patch is not something i was comparing it too.
Click to expand...
Yes, but Steam-like prices is how Microsoft is pitching their DRM. They have stated that with their current DRM plans they will be able to lower prices for the end users. Of course they later came out and stated that games will still be 59.99 MSRP, so it remains to be seen if this is just damage control or they really do want to bring better sale prices out.

I actually think Microsoft's DRM scheme isn't that terrible. The sharing features with family, cloud gaming, and the way the accounts work is pretty slick. I like it. The problem I have is that Microsoft has a pretty terrible track record compared to Valve, and that an account ban loses ALL of your licenses. Even if you have a physical copy of the game, it sounds like if your Live account is banned you can't play it, and that is bullshit.
 
Rizen said:
and that an account ban loses ALL of your licenses. Even if you have a physical copy of the game, it sounds like if your Live account is banned you can't play it, and that is bullshit.
Click to expand...

In a thread where this is discussed I think somebody posted a link where they clarified, saying you'd only be banned from multiplayer. I believe it was an interview with Major Nelson.
 
MS' E3 conference was fine. It focused on the games for the most part and was far, far better than the last two MS E3 conferences and that fuck-terrible Xbox One reveal event. No Kinect, no TV, no sports and no Call of Duty.

It's the media release that came a week before that has made MS incur the wrath of the entire Internet, rather than the E3 conference itself.
 
Jerome36 said:
In a thread where this is discussed I think somebody posted a link where they clarified, saying you'd only be banned from multiplayer. I believe it was an interview with Major Nelson.
Click to expand...

With multiplayer being the focus of most games, the entire game is pretty much banned.
 
Wildace said:
i was talking about the going all digital route, if you are comfortable buying games on steam knowing its digital only and no resale you should be comfortable buying them on xbone.

steam sales and fees to devs to patch is not something i was comparing it too.
Click to expand...

I'm OK with giving up physical distribution for online distribution as long as I find the tradeoffs fair. As such, the aspects of the service from things such as direct costs to me (Xbox live fees), game prices, etc. are relevant.

I'm asking myself this question: If I'm giving up the ability to resell games what am I getting in return?

For steam the answer is really cheap priced games, services such as online community platform and no effort patching of games, and it doesn't cost a monthly fee for those benefits.

For the Xbox live platform: You don't realy get any benefits for giving up the ability to sell used games. The system requires check in every 24 hours or else it wont even play single player games. Titles still start at full price, which to be fair is the same as steam, but knowing MS the "discounted" sale pricing will probably be $5 off on a 1 year old game or something lame like that.
 
canna said:
I'm OK with giving up physical distribution for online distribution as long as I find the tradeoffs fair. As such, the aspects of the service from things such as direct costs to me (Xbox live fees), game prices, etc. are relevant.

I'm asking myself this question: If I'm giving up the ability to resell games what am I getting in return?

For steam the answer is really cheap priced games, services such as online community platform and no effort patching of games, and it doesn't cost a monthly fee for those benefits.

For the Xbox live platform: You don't realy get any benefits for giving up the ability to sell used games. The system requires check in every 24 hours or else it wont even play single player games. Titles still start at full price, which to be fair is the same as steam, but knowing MS the "discounted" sale pricing will probably be $5 off on a 1 year old game or something lame like that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is really the problem. MS has done an absolutely terrible job of positioning their DRM as a good solution for gamers. If they had come out and said, "hey, we're doing XXX with our system and DRM, so that we can offer you great sales on games, let you share them with anyone in your family without needing to loan out the disc, etc" I think it would have been much better received. Instead they tried to hide the negatives and hope no one would notice, and then they didn't even have a unified front on how the changes would ACTUALLY work. If they really wanted to push the digital platform they should have announced something like a 49.99 price point for all new games sold through their digital service.

As it is, their system costs more than the PS4 while being less powerful, the DRM has a bunch of negatives with the positives mostly unknown, and the games will cost the same as the PS4. I don't really see any reason to go with an XBONE unless you really want the media integration.
 
Yeah, the Xbox One DRM really only benefits Gamestop (and other "participating retailers"). It should be readily apparent now that Gamestop is a pox on the gaming industry and is now quite actively screwing over gamers.

Expect the Gamestop-exclusive in-game content to become even worse with the next-gen Xbox One games.
 
One thing a lot of people forget wanting to compare the X1 with Steam (besides all the normal stuff like prices and such) is that MS can't be trusted. They are a scummy company that would whore out their own grandmother if it got them what they wanted. I do not trust them one bit, I can see them after like 12 years of the X1 being out and their new X2 has been on the market for a few years they shut down the servers for X1, they did it for the original Xbox and you know the amount of resources that were used to keep those servers were miniscule to the ones that will be needed for the X1.

MS as a publicly traded company has no one but its shareholders to make happy. MS has a terrible track record with their customers in general and have no problem killing off a product.

At least with Steam, Valve does show they give a fuck. They are privately owned and answer to no one but themselves. People trust Valve and Steam because they don't bend them over any chance they get whispering into your ear, just let it happen, it will be over soon. Valve's track record speaks for itself, they have shown they care about their community and support it. Are they perfect? Hell no, no company is, but have we found an acceptable middle ground with them where both sides are very happy? Yes.

I can't say I feel that way about MS products and looking forward with their track record I don't think I ever will.
 
Plague_Injected said:
MS' E3 conference was fine. It focused on the games for the most part and was far, far better than the last two MS E3 conferences and that fuck-terrible Xbox One reveal event. No Kinect, no TV, no sports and no Call of Duty.

It's the media release that came a week before that has made MS incur the wrath of the entire Internet, rather than the E3 conference itself.
Click to expand...

There were definitely parts in that conference where they actively pissed off the crowd, I don't think I'd label that as fine.
 
next-Jin said:
There were definitely parts in that conference where they actively pissed off the crowd, I don't think I'd label that as fine.
Click to expand...

There was a very audible balking at the price tag, and people had a good lol at the sound going out to the Panzer Dragoon successor game thing, but MS did also reveal more exclusives than Sony did. While the vast majority of them were abysmally underwhelming (Minecraft Xbox One Edition lol), Titanfall was widely considered one of the best games at E3 this year. Compare that to Sony's exclusives, which didn't cause any waves at all. Everybody was talking about how the PS4 still allows you to own your games (to a still-unspecified degree) rather than the system's launch titles. Hell, people are talking way more about The Last Of Us than anything coming out exclusively on PS4 at launch.

The E3 showing certainly didn't sway me into buying MS' overpriced Spybox One, but I don't agree that it was a disaster. E3 2012, 2011 and the Xbox One reveal last month were disasters. The negativity around Microsoft at E3 has nothing to do with the actual E3 showing, but at the obscenely anti-consumer details of the Xbox One that were stupidly released less than a week before E3.
 
In response to the thread title however, I am leaning in favour of it. Microsoft has to - at a bare minimum - change its policies into a far more consumer-friendly model, or consistently release exclusives over the system's lifespan that all have rave reviews (more than those released on 360). In my opinion, MS will need to do both to have the Xbox brand survive as a gaming platform. The rumoured game-free subsidised model might keep Xbox going as an entertainment hub for people who can't or don't like to use remote controls for navigating their media devices (people with some forms of disability could definitely benefit from the Kinect and voice commands).
 
Was at gamestop today, they said the ps4 pre orders were 6x the xbone orders, people are voting with their wallet for once
 
DeathPrincess said:
That's a silly argument for a number of reasons.

1. Perfect games just don't exist. Pick any game ever and it has had a pile of bugs, some of which turn up after release. HL2 was horrendously buggy at launch and wouldn't even load for some people. Some things like save file exploits don't turn up until late on. However much testing you do it is never possible to test everything.

You aren't a console gamer are you? It's much easier to identify a couple buggy console games than the ones that are bug free --- cause nearly all - especially ealier gen console games were bug free.

2. Sometimes the patches aren't for "technical issues". Anything with multiplayer will likely have some kind of balance issue at some point or another. You can playtest the crap out of everything but there's 1000s of possibilities. Look at games like BF3, where several exploits were found months after launch. Stopping developers from "fine tuning" wont make games better.

point valid

3. Free content is bad or impossible. On a free system it costs $0 to add content, so why not. On a $40k system all add-ons will need to make you $40k otherwise you wont be able to do it. The smaller the developer the worse it is.

You don't know that Microsoft is charging for free content. As far as I know that's not a known fact. We scarcely know what Microsoft is charging for. This is not part of the original rebuttal I made.

4. Xbox games are still buggy.

Which? I have an Xbox 360, a PS3, and a PC, and have been a PC gamer since the late 1980's. By FAR and AWAY - PC games are incredibly more buggy than console games have ever been.

5. There isn't free patching of "beta" clients. So that means less testing, not more. Plus with the fee for patches that means less fine tuning and the cutoff point for "just ship it" is shorter.

huh?

6. They do it to get money. Same as the ads and every other thing they do. :p

your opinion - not fact (ads are not the same as charging for patch/bug fixes)

7. It affects little guys way more than big guys. Big corporations make $50k in 3 seconds, little guys would need to turn to Kickstarter or something. So big corporations will care less about the patching as it's a small fee, smaller guys wont be able to patch

Do you know if the price scales based on sales or size of shop? Since when has Microsoft thwarted small developers? They promote all the time that they want small developers - provide free xbox creation tools to students etc. Xbox live seems to have way more indie arcade type titles than PSN.
Click to expand...


see red counters
 
IMG_20130618_141459.JPG
 
next-Jin said:
  • 33% weaker hardware compared to the PS4

  • Cloud Computing (PS4 also does this)
  • Live TV w/ widgets (No Cable DVR?)
  • Skype
  • Family Plan (Only useful for friends located off site)
  • Release day online game sales (How is this a positive? Everyone already does this)
  • Kinect with every system allowing gesture controls and universal support for games

Those are the major things I have heard from either Microsoft's PR or Xbox fans, and frankly that is a sad list.
Click to expand...

I got some beef with the 33% weaker hardware , I'm no fan of MS but the idea that MS somehow started sucking badly at designing a spec which would get them their goals (say 1080p with decent amount of framebuffer action). Xbox 360 was good !?

The only bad thing about the 360 was the lack of heatsinks and spacing the machine itself spec wise was certainly a good thing.

People are talking about the memory speed (2133 ddr3 vs gddr5 at 5.5ghz)we still have to see what Sony and MS does game wise, it is doubtful that Sony will get 90 fps on a title that will get 60 fps on MS, if you turn that around Sony getting 60 fps and MS getting only 42?

MS policies are stupid , I don't think anyone would disagree but the hardware would be a total shocker if it is 33% slower
 
well duh, the graphics settings will be dumbed down for the xbone, to have the same fps... but games should look better on PS4 by design.
 
I didn't believe it so I went to Google/Bing and typed it in and got the same results lol

O5dSpJ5.png
 
did the same thing and it doesn't show that Kaotik.. think you are making it up.
 
Barrok said:
did the same thing and it doesn't show that Kaotik.. think you are making it up.
Click to expand...

I think you are the one that is in the wrong, I just typed it again and got the same results.

EDIT: Made the post a bit nicer, didn't mean to come off so rude.
 
Last edited:
KaOTiK said:
I think you are full of shit, I just typed it again and got the same results.
Click to expand...

Meh, not sure how to post a picture :p

open the pic from the link below, that is what mine looks like. Same as google.


arTlZ4l.jpg
 
Barrok said:
did the same thing and it doesn't show that Kaotik.. think you are making it up.
Click to expand...

That list of potential searches is based on your previous search history, so it's not going to always be the same for everyone.

However, with a fresh browser (try incognito mode if it's still not happening for you) I'm getting the same results as Kaotik. And that's hillarious.
 
I get the exact same thing on chrome as I do Internet explorer (all cache wiped out and history removed and cookies removed) which isn't "amazing"

same thing in incognito mode...
 
Barrok said:
Meh, not sure how to post a picture :p

open the pic from the link below, that is what mine looks like. Same as google.

http://i.imgur.com/arTlZ4l.jpg?2

arTlZ4l.jpg
Click to expand...

I did edit my post before you made this, so I do apologize for coming off as it I did (just don't appreciate being called a liar basically), didn't mean to come off so rude.

I have no idea why you see it like you are (I believe you seeing the pic). I tried it in chrome and firefox and other people on a couple of other forums all see it the way the pic I posted shows it.
 
Barrok said:
I get the exact same thing on chrome as I do Internet explorer (all cache wiped out and history removed and cookies removed) which isn't "amazing"

same thing in incognito mode...
Click to expand...

I get barrok's results too. Maybe it's regional? Midwest here.
 
I also got "is a cable box" lol

fwiw you could've searched "xbox one is awesome" then it would've remembered that for a later #1 spot
 
Youn said:
I also got "is a cable box" lol

fwiw you could've searched "xbox one is awesome" then it would've remembered that for a later #1 spot
Click to expand...

i wonder if using "is awesome" several times with other searches will automatically add it as the first auto-complete displayed?
 
I get very similar results, for "xbox one is," but to be fair, if I do "ps4 is" I get some of these:

"ps4 issues"
"ps4 is going to fail"
"ps4 is a joke"

Either way, both of these consoles are still several months away from even releasing, but it's like everybody is on the payroll of one company or the other. Here's hoping there's another 8 years before we go through it again. :)
 
stormdlp said:
I'm getting it, i don't care, Xbox fan.
Click to expand...

It is Xbox fans who are the most livid about the Xbox One. PlayStation fans are too busy laughing and going into Super Apologist Mode over multiplayer getting shoved behind a paywall for PS4.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
I got some beef with the 33% weaker hardware , I'm no fan of MS but the idea that MS somehow started sucking badly at designing a spec which would get them their goals (say 1080p with decent amount of framebuffer action). Xbox 360 was good !?

The only bad thing about the 360 was the lack of heatsinks and spacing the machine itself spec wise was certainly a good thing.

People are talking about the memory speed (2133 ddr3 vs gddr5 at 5.5ghz)we still have to see what Sony and MS does game wise, it is doubtful that Sony will get 90 fps on a title that will get 60 fps on MS, if you turn that around Sony getting 60 fps and MS getting only 42?

MS policies are stupid , I don't think anyone would disagree but the hardware would be a total shocker if it is 33% slower
Click to expand...
Its not the memory people speak of. The PS4 has a 50% more powerful GPU. The XBox One is specced at 1.2 TFlops, the PS4 is specced at 1.8 TFlops..
 
Jerome36 said:
Either way, both of these consoles are still several months away from even releasing, but it's like everybody is on the payroll of one company or the other.
Click to expand...

I actually work for both companies; to instigate and foment a real life conflict between the two parties. The massive loss of life that will result from this will simultaneously alleviate strained resources, hunger and pollution issues, whilst toppling the video game industry permanently and causing the utter collapse of the IT sector as a whole ending decades of an insidious control apparatus that the entire market secretly represented.

The remaining survivors will no longer be fettered by technology and distracted by something that ultimately does not exist. The public will no longer be self-absorbed, self-important and caught up within a dialectic used by those that wish to keep us at odds with each other and not at odds with them.

They mean to keep this faux conflict under the guise of "fanboyism" at a heightened state to serve their interest but without it ever escalating into an actual physical confrontation. I am here as an agent provocateur to push this rivalry into an exponential chain of violence and revenge in order to put a stop to their plans once and for all.

Sacrifices must be made.

This is the only way.

This is why I do this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top